HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sharks Ticket Price Increases Coming, Changes for 2012-2013

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-08-2012, 01:27 AM
  #26
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shark Fin Soup View Post
Man, with a lot of people not renewing, goodbye Boyle, Marleau, or Thornton. One of them might have to go just to save them money.
Sharks are making quite a bit of money. If they want to maintain the same profit margins, yes, they might have to let go of someone. But overall, they are raking in a profit (just by owning the team and getting some HP pavilion reciepts, which are huge).

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:29 AM
  #27
CrazedZooChimp
Not enough guts
 
CrazedZooChimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,742
vCash: 1875
Send a message via AIM to CrazedZooChimp
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Yup, same here - Sec 201, row 13. Much better seats than 203/204, which presumably would now have higher prices.

I'm guessing my $35 seats will probably go to $37 (a 5.7% increase) - inline with the increases in 214-216 row 2-12 seats ($53->$56) .
I am confused why they didn't make the blue line to blue line the most expensive tickets.

I wonder if this means I'll be able to specify attacking end twice for a 10 game pack though, the last two years I got screwed and was in the non-attack end despite being in the attack end the two years before that.

CrazedZooChimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:09 AM
  #28
Slurms McKenzie
Wam wam wazzle!
 
Slurms McKenzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Jose
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 593
vCash: 500
i'm in 212 last row and 35 a game was kinda bank this year...it's kind of hard to just cancel because of the unused ticket credit from being bounced this early (in a sense, we are kind of pot committed). it's starting to become a very expensive luxury with lousy results.

Slurms McKenzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 09:21 AM
  #29
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Sharks are making quite a bit of money. If they want to maintain the same profit margins, yes, they might have to let go of someone. But overall, they are raking in a profit (just by owning the team and getting some HP pavilion reciepts, which are huge).
Forbes would disagree with you on that. According to their analysis, the Sharks are operating just slightly below breakeven at their current payroll level.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 09:22 AM
  #30
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurms McKenzie View Post
i'm in 212 last row and 35 a game was kinda bank this year...it's kind of hard to just cancel because of the unused ticket credit from being bounced this early (in a sense, we are kind of pot committed). it's starting to become a very expensive luxury with lousy results.
The unused ticket credit is one game.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:14 AM
  #31
Iron Chef
Registered User
 
Iron Chef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurms McKenzie View Post
i'm in 212 last row and 35 a game was kinda bank this year...it's kind of hard to just cancel because of the unused ticket credit from being bounced this early (in a sense, we are kind of pot committed). it's starting to become a very expensive luxury with lousy results.
From what I understand, you can slide that money over to the individual game ticket purchases. At least that's what my ticket rep told me a few years ago when I put a deposit down, but asked if it was non-refundable.

I'm pretty sure you can just get a refund on that unused playoff ticket money right? Its not like it was a deposit. You pre-paid for games that never happened.

Iron Chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:16 AM
  #32
Nighthock
**** the Kings...
 
Nighthock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 15,801
vCash: 163
I still remember when the last row of the upper bowl was 17 bucks ...

Nighthock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:24 AM
  #33
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 500
Too much success in too short a time. Now they are emulating cup winners pricing without having a cup.

do0glas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:33 AM
  #34
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,520
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
-Quickest postseason exit in team history
-Raise ticket prices

Yeah that makes sense.
I agree with your point, but the year after the Sharks beat the presidents trophy winning Red Wings, they played them again in a series referred to as the "tennis series". Detroit won all 4 games by scores of 6-0,6-2,6-0,6-2.

Clowe Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:39 AM
  #35
Paka Ono
Pro Ice Girl Scout
 
Paka Ono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SF
Posts: 1,010
vCash: 500
SVSE decides to keep DW & raise prices?!

EFF YOU!

Paka Ono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:45 AM
  #36
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,520
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
Forbes would disagree with you on that. According to their analysis, the Sharks are operating just slightly below breakeven at their current payroll level.
Forbes isn't exactly the most credible source for sports economics. They have been wrong in the past.

Clowe Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:46 AM
  #37
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazedZooChimp View Post
I wonder if this means I'll be able to specify attacking end twice for a 10 game pack though, the last two years I got screwed and was in the non-attack end despite being in the attack end the two years before that.
I would assume so, since they would be two different price points.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:51 AM
  #38
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
Forbes would disagree with you on that. According to their analysis, the Sharks are operating just slightly below breakeven at their current payroll level.
Take what they, and the Sharks, say with a very big grain of salt. The Sharks are always quite specific - they claim that the Sharks are losing money. They are completely silent on whether SVSE is profitable (nor how revenues/expenses are split between the two). When I explicitly asked Greg Jaimison (at a STH breakfast) about the then recent claims of Sharks losses and whether SVSE was profitable on the arena he gave me a sheepish grin while dancing his way through a no comment.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:53 AM
  #39
deekortiz3
HFBoards Sponsor
 
deekortiz3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob330i View Post
KDB, I tend to agree. I sit in sec 214, row 14, two rows above the next price tier (actually two price tiers) and two seats in from the blue line aisle. I think it's been the sweet spot cost vs. view and unless I win the lotto, will hold these seats forever.
As a STH in section 215 row 12 I envy your seats so much. If I can't move into what were the yellow seats this year, I don't think I can justify keeping my seats.

deekortiz3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 11:59 AM
  #40
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nighthock View Post
I still remember when the last row of the upper bowl was 17 bucks ...
Well, they were $17 (STH price) as recently as '05-'06 and '06-'07.

Now, I still remember when the last row of the upper bowl was 14 bucks ...

Anyone remember what the seats in the 100's at the Palace of Fine Cows went for.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:26 PM
  #41
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,520
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Take what they, and the Sharks, say with a very big grain of salt. The Sharks are always quite specific - they claim that the Sharks are losing money. They are completely silent on whether SVSE is profitable (nor how revenues/expenses are split between the two). When I explicitly asked Greg Jaimison (at a STH breakfast) about the then recent claims of Sharks losses and whether SVSE was profitable on the arena he gave me a sheepish grin while dancing his way through a no comment.
Well, of course he won't give you a straight answer. That is the problem with businesses, they aren't honest with their customers or employees.

If they claimed that the Sharks were profitable and SVSE was doing great, how would they be able to justify a price increase? Reading between the lines, it's easy to see that the Sharks are making profit and are running just fine. If they weren't, they would have DW up against the cap floor, instead of the ceiling where they are now.

Clowe Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:27 PM
  #42
ChompChomp
SACK T-MAC
 
ChompChomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dallas, TX (Ugh)
Country: United States
Posts: 8,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
I agree with your point, but the year after the Sharks beat the presidents trophy winning Red Wings, they played them again in a series referred to as the "tennis series". Detroit won all 4 games by scores of 6-0,6-2,6-0,6-2.
Actually, it was 6-0,6-2,6-2,6-2. Still a painful memory.

But at least that playoffs lasted 11 games, 6 more than this year's Sharks playoffs. Sharks management would have taken another round 2 tennis series this season, just to get into Round 2 and two home playoff games.

ChompChomp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:36 PM
  #43
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Take what they, and the Sharks, say with a very big grain of salt. The Sharks are always quite specific - they claim that the Sharks are losing money. They are completely silent on whether SVSE is profitable (nor how revenues/expenses are split between the two). When I explicitly asked Greg Jaimison (at a STH breakfast) about the then recent claims of Sharks losses and whether SVSE was profitable on the arena he gave me a sheepish grin while dancing his way through a no comment.
The question to which you might get an answer is "How many years have the owners had to make a cash infusion or take a loan to support the entire entity?" An answer of 3 or less would say they are doing fine. STH drop on the year following the Nolan/Sutter/Lombo debacle, lockout year and the year they raised payroll and lost to the Ducks in the first. They might have lost when they lost two minor sports in one year (arena football and one other).

We need to remind all that they are spending significantly on capital projects like ice rinks, the ad ribbon, etc.

They really can't hide revenue as there are proscriptions in the CBA but they can shift expenses to their hearts' desire.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:39 PM
  #44
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,520
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChompChomp View Post
Actually, it was 6-0,6-2,6-2,6-2. Still a painful memory.

But at least that playoffs lasted 11 games, 6 more than this year's Sharks playoffs. Sharks management would have taken another round 2 tennis series this season, just to get into Round 2 and two home playoff games.
That's right. They beat Calgary in the 1st round thanks to Ray Whitney.

Jeez, disappointment is just ruining my long-term memory.

Clowe Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:41 PM
  #45
Hold the Pickles
Registered User
 
Hold the Pickles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 03-K64
Country: United States
Posts: 2,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobabygo View Post
208 row 6

Yeahhhhh those are going to be available for you guys. I'm out.
Holy smokes, for years I had 208 row 7, forget the seat numbers, but they were the aisle seats closest to 209. How long have you been there?

Hold the Pickles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:59 PM
  #46
CrazedZooChimp
Not enough guts
 
CrazedZooChimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,742
vCash: 1875
Send a message via AIM to CrazedZooChimp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Me View Post
I agree with your point, but the year after the Sharks beat the presidents trophy winning Red Wings, they played them again in a series referred to as the "tennis series". Detroit won all 4 games by scores of 6-0,6-2,6-0,6-2.
Pretty sure that was in the second round, follow Ray Whitney's amazing game 7 double OT goal to beat Calgary in round 1. The best goal in Sharks history.

edit: Welp, beaten to the correction.

CrazedZooChimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:26 PM
  #47
Slurms McKenzie
Wam wam wazzle!
 
Slurms McKenzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Jose
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
The unused ticket credit is one game.
we split payment with 5 people on 4 seats, so we're on the hook too for unplayed games in round 2.

Slurms McKenzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 02:01 PM
  #48
sharksohnoes!
yeahokayidiot
 
sharksohnoes!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Yayarea
Posts: 3,758
vCash: 500
Well. Plenty of room at the Cow Palace for new SF Bulls STH 2 seats, center ice, 12 games, $400

sharksohnoes! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:18 PM
  #49
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Take what they, and the Sharks, say with a very big grain of salt. The Sharks are always quite specific - they claim that the Sharks are losing money. They are completely silent on whether SVSE is profitable (nor how revenues/expenses are split between the two). When I explicitly asked Greg Jaimison (at a STH breakfast) about the then recent claims of Sharks losses and whether SVSE was profitable on the arena he gave me a sheepish grin while dancing his way through a no comment.
Silicon Valley Sports and Entertainment is not just the Sharks. Forbes had access to the NHL financial statements when they did their study of all the NHL teams and it was quite accurate. SVSE might be making money, but the Sharks themselves are not, and that is including game concession revenue. They could be if they cut payroll a bit. They are a break even business at best, which is actually success in terms of pro hockey team ownership. But the idea that the Sharks are making a bunch of money is ridiculous.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:21 PM
  #50
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurms McKenzie View Post
we split payment with 5 people on 4 seats, so we're on the hook too for unplayed games in round 2.
What? We don't get billed for Round 2 unless we get out of Round 1, which we didn't. The only credit is the Game 6 from Round 1 that was not played.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.